In spite of all the reasons I have to not like this President, Barack Obama, it is with a heavy heart that I approach the question in today’s title. I have had strong differences with most of the presidents in my life time, however, I have never questioned a president’s loyalty to country or to the men and women who serve our country. Yet the bizarre handling by this president and his surrogates of the attacks on our diplomatic mission in Libya and the events leading up to the attacks, compels me to ask if Barack Obama and his senior advisor committed treason against the men in Benghazi. The President and his administration have been less than forthcoming about what happened in Benghazi, Libya. What we do know is only due to information leaking out and made public by Fox News. No other media outlet is covering this story.

Let’s start with a definition of treason and then see if the story that is unfolding fits.

We know that since the fall of Gaddafi that Libya was a very unstable place with many jihadists militia groups roaming the country. We know that there had been many violent demonstrations in the months prior to the attacks including attacks on British diplomats and a bomb thrown against the wall of our Benghazi consulate. We know that Ambassador Stevens asked several times for additional security and those requests were denied. We know that there was a sixteen man security force there under the command of Lt. Col. Andy Woods and, against his recommendation , he and his men were ordered out of Libya weeks before the attack.

So, we have a diplomatic mission in one of the most dangerous places in the world and not only does this administration deny requests for increased security, it removes what security was there. How does one explain that? How does one rationalize that? It’s as if this administration was setting the stage for a crisis situation to occur. But, where is the logic in that? Stella Paul, writing for American Thinker has a theory. She asks her readers to think about what this administration did in the Fast and Furious fiasco. They intentional walked guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels to prove the 90% lie that most of the guns used in the border violence were coming from American gun dealers. They planned to use that lie to attack our Second Amendment right to bear arms. Ms. paul suggest that maybe the Benghazi fiasco was designed to attack our First Amendment right of free speech. When we consider how quickly and how well organized this administration’s response to the Benghazi attack was to sell the idea that this attack was due to someone abusing their right to free speech, it begins to give Ms. Paul’s theory some credence. Think about it. Obama, Susan Rice, and Hillary Clinton all out putting the blame for the attack on some YouTube video that insulted the Muslim religion. And, even after the truth began leaking out, this president kept up the story of the video for weeks.

This Administration’s Response to the Attacks

Thanks to Fox News we know that the annex (safe house) one mile from the counsulate in Benghazi was in fact a CIA outpost. We know there were several people in that annex at the time the attack began on the consulate. We know that two of the people at the annex were ex-navy Seals, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. We know that Woods could hear the shots coming from the consulate and that he called his commander and reported that the consulate was under attack and tha he and Doherty were going to take some men and go help Ambassador Stevens and the others. We know that Woods was ordered to stand down. We know that Woods called his commander again an hour later because the attack on the consulate continued and he could hear explosions and he again asked permission to give aid to the people under attack. We know that Woods was ordered to stand down a second time. We know that Woods and Doherty disobeyed that order and fought their way into the consulate and got several people out but could not find the Ambassador. We know that Woods and te others fought their way back to the annex which was then under attack, also. We know that they got a man in position on the roof of the annex and painted with a laser the motor the attackers were setting up and asked for an air strike and reinforcements. We know that no aide was given. We know those brave men fought for four or five more hours and were finally killed

by a mortar round.

Who Gave the Order to Stand Down? Why was No Aide Given?

Nearly seven weeks later we still have no answers from this administration. What about the Panetta Doctrine?

…I think bigger, problem with the Panetta doctrine. If the circumstances in Libya didn’t meet the “enough information” threshold for a rescue attempt or some other form of intervention, then what does? …

The Panetta doctrine is asinine! Several retired Generals have said as much. And, what do we hear from president Obama about who gave the order to stand down? He has diligently avoided answering that question. But, he did tell ABC News this the other day:

Really, Mr. President? I thought you said at the last debate that the buck stops with you. And, thanks again to Fox news, we know that you were in the WH Situation Room watching the attack in real-time. You, Mr. President, have to know who gave the order to stand down and if you didn’t over-ride that order, it is as if the order came from you.

It Gets Worse

The latest information leaking out is the worst of all, if true. We are now hearing that Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette and General Carter F. Ham, the Combatant Commander of Africa Command (AFRICOM) were both ready to send assistance to Benghazi and both were ordered to stand down. The story continues that when both men refused to stand down, they were relieved of their duty. You can read about it here, here, here, here, and here. We don’t know if this story will be proven to be true. If it is proven to be true, then the order to stand down was not an error of judgement by a field commander. It was a deliberate betrayal of our Libyan diplomatic mission that cost the lives of four brave Americans.

Dear friends, if the story about Admiral Gaouette and General Ham turns out to be true, we can not let this story die with these elections. America must learn who gave the order to stand down. That person and everyone above him in the chain of command, up to and including the Commander-in-Chief, are guilty of treason, of betrayal. We owe it to the men who died in Benghazi to identify those who betrayed them and to hold them accountable. WE OWE THEM!

SECTION 3. Clause 1. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court.

In this case, the cover-up is NOT worse than the crime. This is not just negligence, this is murder. But who is going to lead the charge, certainly not the Justice Department, they are complicit also. Will the MSM take this and run with it? HA! Read my tagline.

6
posted on 11/01/2012 2:55:00 AM PDT
by ImNotLying
(The MSM bears a close resemblance to the world's oldest profession!)

In the extreme, it clearly was murder. Why? Perhaps we need to critically investigate ambassador Stephens background and activities for dept. of state. He was doing business with the Muslim brotherhood. Once we establish MOTIVE, those responsible will murder us too.

I don’t consider Obama’s actions treason any more than I consider Admiral Yamamoto’s attack on Pearl Harbor to be treason. Regardless of Obama’s alleged or actual birth place, he’s no more an American in his mind or in his actions than any other enemy of our country.

12
posted on 11/01/2012 3:21:52 AM PDT
by Pollster1
(Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)

Treason and International Terrorism. Don’t forget that over three hundred Mexican civilians were murdered in Fast and Furious as well. So netween both incidents, we have two murdered Federal Officers on the border and 300 plus Mexican civilians, 6 Americans in Benghazi and an untold number of Libyan civilians...and possibly an untold number of Syrian civilians. Not to mention Egypt. These are acts of war against sovereign nations that had done nothing to us...and three of them were our allies.

If the General and Admiral were told to stand down (regardless of the reasons for change in command), then I'd say yes, someone at the highest levels refused to grant authority to strike and in doing so left our people to die.

I would also use caution when using spell check. Aid, not aide; mortar, not motor. Minor typos can negatively impact credibility.

15
posted on 11/01/2012 3:35:30 AM PDT
by Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)

The best answer to explain Obama’s behavior is that we gave the Libyan rebels some of our very good Surface to Air Missiles so they could shoot down Assad’s airplanes.

Panetta’s “lack of information” claim could relate to us not knowing where these SAM’s were now and fearing that they could take out our C-130 gun ships, thus causing a Carter-esque failure with crashed rescue vehicles for the world to see.

Lies, sharia-law-like attack on amendment 1, and more lies and more lies and more lies.

TREASON...real time...without remorse...continuous...like this republic has never seen before...ongoing.

FUBO
Ftheexcusemakers

“—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Better dust off the impeachment proceedings manual. Congress, its time for you to do your job.

Sorry, impeachment is only for removal from office. He must be out of office to be charged with treason (or similar charges) so that the office itself doen't protect him.

So, he needs to be out of office (one way or another) prior to being criminally charged, tried, and punished. Personally, I can wait until after January to see him frog-marched, dressed in orange and chains, and tried/convicted in court.

Well, yeah, but what? Except for a very select few, the only thing they seem to care about is their paychecks. There’s a pretty long list of outrageous things this administration has done. What does it take to light a fire under their rear ends?

murder is apparently within the Obama administration’s tool kit. This I witnessed years ago in the Philippines where Marcos govt assassinated Ninoy Aquino in cold blood. We immediately got the score and left. Stephens was targeted and murdered. I strongly believe he served as Obama’s bagman for the brotherhood. He knew to much and has a loose tongue.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.